Europeans Still Battling Software Patents

rimberg writes "The FFII in the UK is issuing an alert for all supporters to write to their MPs -- this weekend . In September the European Parliament voted for strong restrictions on software patents. But these could be set aside at a meeting of the EU's Competitiveness Council of Ministers on 10 November. The ministers' meeting is to be "prepared" at a meeting of senior patent officials from across Europe even sooner: this Thursday 23 October. Unless they can be convinced otherwise before 10 November, it is believed that UK ministers will push for the Council to adopt a November 2002 draft text, which is even worse than the infamous McCarthy report. The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it very difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council. The FFII says it desperately need a lot of letters to go out to MPs this weekend to tell the Government how bad the November 2002 draft is. More information at FFII-UK."

Comments

Example

[Ed Avis]

Copying form letters is very bad - they don't get read. But if you're wondering about how to use LaTeX you might want to look at some stuff wot I wrote earlier today. (mp_letter.tex in that directory; the other .tex files are earlier stuff.) I don't want to hold it up as a great exemplar though... write your own words and opinions. (But follow the FFII guidelines!)

Knoppix is a victim too

[saskboy]

I tried visiting
http://www.knoppix.org for the first time about 2 weeks ago and was greeted by bad news about European law in the works.

The email/fax that I sent

[Morosoph]

Please no-one use this "as is", especially if they live in Cambridge; I only want to encourage others to craft a decent letter.

Dear Anne Campbell,

A few weeks ago, I emailed you concerning software patents, with patent laws being passed in the European Parliament, and soon to be put through to UK law.

Last month, the European Parliament voted for strong restrictions upon software patents, but it is my understanding that UK ministers at the Competitiveness Council of Ministers are likely to push for the Parliament amendments to be overturned. This would be a disaster for software development within Britain.

The UK Patent Office have been lobbying for unlimited patentability, and whilst their consultation found a lot of support from patent professionals were in favour, the views of programmers were extremely hostile. Strong patent laws are not good for the industry, although they might be good for big companies: in the USA, large companies build portfolios of software patents, which creates a minefield for programmers, as every program contains steps which could be considered innovative, meaning that before long, it becomes impossible to write programs of any complexity without stepping upon some of these patents. Although these patents ultimately might not stand up in court, the fear of law and the resources of large companies means that the interests of smaller outfits and individuals are overwhelmed. This is not an efficiency, for the cost is not the natural cost of doing business, but an artificial one of compliance with the regulation.

I should add that in the USA, cross-licensing of patent portfolios is commonplace, creating government-enforced cartels, as those working for such companies don't need to worry about compliance. This is actually proof that patent laws are inefficient, since firms would rather absolve one another of their patent obligations than enforce them. An excellent case against software patents is put forward by Laura Creighton, a software venture capitalist, to be found at http://www.vrijschrift.org/swpat/030508_1/.

I am faxing, as well as emailing this letter because of the urgency of the issue: there is to be a series of meeting of patent officials throughout Europe on Thursday 23 October ahead of the meeting of the Competitiveness Council of Ministers.

This is a serious worry for me, and not a theoretical idealisation. Everyone that I know in the industry has told be how worried they are about what future laws we are likely to end up with. I hope that you can put the case to Stephen Timms MP, the minister for e-commerce at the DTI, and cast your vote at a future date against an excessive patent regime.

Yours sincerely,

Tim Wesson.

Fax your MP - I did.

[jregel]

Please do NOT copy this word for word. Personal faxes are better. Here's an edited version of my fax:

Dear Mr David Drew,

I am writing to you to make you aware of a very real problem that will affect the computer industry in the UK. I am a technical consultant for a software division of the ********* - one of the largest IT services companies in this country. I care passionately about this industry and want to see it succeed. Unfortunately the British Government is being encouraged to promote a draft resolution concerning software patents ("Directive on the Patentability of Computer-Implemented Inventions") that will cause great harm to many companies in the UK.

As I am sure you are aware, the idea of patents is to foster innovation by encouraging individuals and companies to make public their work in exchange for certain rights (e.g., royalties obtained through licensing). While this concept works in many situations, the use of patents in computer software is damaging the IT industry by doing the exact opposite that was intended. This is the situation the United States finds itself in where software patents have been granted for several years.

The main problem with software patents is that it is extremely difficult for non-technical individuals to determine whether a patent is actually valid or whether it is either obvious or subject to prior art without a significant investment of time and resources. As you can imagine, this places a great burden on the organisation responsible for granting the patent. The US Patent Office has typically dealt with software patents by granting them and allowing any dispute to be argued in the courts. This has resulted in a climate where patent portfolios are used as negotiation tools when dealing with other companies - you can safely infringe on other companies' patents if they infringe on yours, creating a patent "stalemate". This is leading to a stiffling of innovation, especially with smaller companies without a portfolio.

On the 24th September, the European Parliament voted on a directive that included an ammendment that would prevent "a drift toward US-style patentability of pure software and business methods". Unfortunately, the European Commission are hostile to the aforementioned ammendment and are threatening to remove it. The British Government is being encouraged by the UK Patent Office to push a November 2002 draft that removes the ammendment in favour of a patent "free for all". The European Parliament's rules for second reading make it very difficult for MEPs to fix a bad text from the Council. Therefore is is imperative that the best possible text is promoted by the British Government.

If the November 2002 draft is accepted, it will have a negative impact on the IT industry in the UK. The only people to benefit from such a law would be the US IT industry that already has a huge patent portfolio and patent lawyers. Everyone else will lose.

A petition of over 288,000 names has been signed by people who work in IT in Europe and recognise the impact that software patents will have on both the industry and the economy. For more information on how widespread the concern for this issue is, please consult http://patents.eurolinux.org and http://swpat.ffii.org/

I appreciate that the issue of software patents is dry and not particularly interesting, but in the interests of the software industry in this country, I would ask for your help. Please could you bring this issue to the attention of Mr Stephen Timms, the Minister for E-Commerce at the DTI, forwarding my concerns.

Thanking you in anticipation.

Regards